Skip to main content
7:00 am
building nascar race tracks, that you wouldn't have built without credits from the government. it's not a great policy long run, but it will make jobs in the short run. >> you're the only guy who likes electric motor scooters and nascar. >> it's time for an opportunity to take my scooter out on the track. >> brenda: all right. gary b, i have a feeling you don't agree. >> i don't, brenda. look, i do agree with one point jonas made, no one can disagree that stimulus spending creates jobs. we're all in agreement about that. the real question, is that dollar better spent by the government or is it spent-- better spent by the private sector? look, this has been studied and the multiplier, essentially, what does a dollar create in the gdp? the multiplier for government spending, stimulus spending is .64, that means every dollar you and i, brenda, give to the government and for our taxes, only raises gdp 64 cents.
7:01 am
it says right there, no matter if you think it's great to have wind farms or hollywood producers getting breaks, the money is spent inefficiently, it's much better spent as gary k points out, in the private sector, that's why we could spend all the money we want on stimulus, it's not going to create as many jobs as if you and i had spent it ourselves. >> caroline, that's called basically crowding out, it's an economic term. the bottom line is if the government spends the money there won't be as much in the private sector, it's crowding is out. do you see this as a problem for the the labor market? >> well, no, i think the only way and history has proven the only way in which we stimulate an economy when it's in recession, such as the one we're in is through government spending and would i challenge the stats on the multiplier effect that have to do a lot with money going to the service sector, where it has almost no effect, which is dragging that down. but most government spending, especially the recent stimulus, had an incredible multiplier effect.
7:02 am
in fact, sandy is saying we're talking about millions jobs saved or created and other estimates range from 1 to 4 million cbo estimates. so i'm glad we agree that stimulus spending does stimulate the economy. >> i'm not in agreement with that, i'm sorry, there's no agreement on that. the bottom line, when you -- when government spends there's no profits, they're not making any money out of it, it comes out taxpayer dollar and we are he doing deficit spending here and guess what, that has to be paid back eventually. >> brenda: right, gary k. but the stock market isn't agreeing with you, wall street isn't agreeing with you, had an incredible week. i think the best week for stocks since december of 2011. >> right, but remember, that was, you know, that was relief rally off in the fiscal cliff. if you're going back to the big story here, you know, gary b, in this particular round of pork, which is a gigantic round about 65 billion dollars, you realize that
7:03 am
corporations in the united states, all the taxes they paid in 2012 was about 150 billion dollars. so, on a big scale here, what we're seeing is, that we're giving almost half of what they paid in taxes, that to big corporations in pork. now, gary, these are pork deals, these are not the government putting money, this is the government giving a corporation a benefit for spending money, so, if your argument is right, gary b, this should be good. the bigger issue is that we're in an age now where we just talk the talk about how we were going to, you know, fess up and do the right thing. and the minute we got into 2013, we did exactly the same thing that got us into this mess and i feel like we're having deja vu 2010 and talking about the stimulus again, come on. >> brenda: maybe they're talking the talk, but the money walks, because wall street as i said had an incredible week. why do you think that stocks went up if we've seen all of this feeding at the trough?
7:04 am
>> free money. it's as simple as that. you have all this money going into the system in the near term. not just in this government spending, but being, you've got printed being around the world between the central banks, trillions being printed and when you have a fixed asset like the markets and all of this money chasing fixed assets, the asset price goes up. whether or not that goes in the long-term, i'm not sure because eventually it's going to be earnings and a lot of other things that matter. >> brenda: so, gary b, if stocks keep going up on this, isn't that, isn't that good for the economy, good for the labor market? >> well, and brenda, i think there's a deficit disconnect and there has been between what the market is doing. >> bingo. >> and what the employment picture looks like. look, you have the same unemployment number as you did with all the stimulus spending when president obama took office. so, you know, to caroline's point, my gosh, stimulus spending is wonderful, helpful, it's so great. i don't see -- i'm scratching my head to see that the
7:05 am
unemployment number whether you looked the at the u-6 number, the people that have given up looking for jobs or look at the raw unemployment number has done nothing since he took office in january of '09, that stimulus spending helps somehow. in fact, i don't see how you can make the argument the government picking industries to prosper like the whole wind farm thing, as opposed to oil and coal, is a good effective use of money. >> brenda: okay, caroline? >> because oil and coal, why do you think these oil and coal industries are so successful? they got funds upfront from the government. we've actually developed every major energy source and now moving to green energy and you're saying we shouldn't invest in it. >> the government has developed every major energy source? my gosh, and-- >> hold on, guys, go ahead. >> and oil-- >> right, the only reason that these major entities, alternative energies get developed and they're alternative at the time they're produced, whether we're talking timber, coal,
7:06 am
oil or nuclear is because of massive government investment. this is nothing new. >> caroline. >> we use today invest 1% of our federal budget on alternative energy 100 years ago and now only investing 1/10 of 1% and grudgingly, even though green energy spending has created a million jobs in the last four years. so, yes, it does create jobs and-- >> caroline. >> to compare what's happened are you saying that unemployment hasn't gone down? it certainly has. >> brenda: go ahead. toby, one man's loophole is another man's tax incentive? >> well, i mean, here is a news flash, caroline, god bless you, the actual reason that prices have gone up for these resources has been actual demand, actually the market demanded, the lowest most cost efficient energy source, that's fossil fuels. and green jobs were created, listen, i go right to the lobby, right to the green lobby, whatever jobs are created were created at a cost of about $600,000 per quote, unquote, job. those jobs only--
7:07 am
>> okay. >> they were getting these amazing subsidies, so-- >> all right, guys, i'm sorry, our viewers hate it when everybody talks over each other. so i've got to stop you. that's got to be the last word. thanks, guys. >> sorry. >> brenda: think it's just taxes on the rich going up from na fiscal cliff deal? think again. cavuto's gang crunching the number. is everyone about to get crunched? that's the bottom of the hour. and here next, even though these guys aren't getting the job done, they're getting a pay hike and someone here says they deserve it.
7:08 am
7:09 am
7:10 am
>> hi, everyone, we're live from america's news headquarters, i'm jamie colby. we had a tsunami warning for parts of the u.s. coast, but it's now been canceled after a powerful 7.5 magnitude earthquake hit 60 miles off of alaska early this morning. that quake triggered the tsunami warning covering hundreds of miles of alaskan and canadian coast line. and immediately after the announcement, folks at sea level rushed to higher ground. the warning called off after no significant tidal wave was generated. help on the way for victims of superstorm sandy. congress now approving nearly 10 billion dollars in aid yesterday afternoon. northeast lawmakers are seek ago total of 60 billion dollars for storm relieve. house speaker john boehner promised to vote on the remaining aid later this
7:11 am
month, elsewhere in the budget. i'm jamie colby, back to bulls and bears. keep it here on the fox news channel. >> brenda: just days after president obama lifted the federal worker pay freeze, some lawmakers trying to refreeze their own salaries, saying they don't deserve the extra money, but caroline, you say they not only deserve it, they're underpaid, huh? >> i think they're underpaid, brenda, when you look the at the average amount that a ceo in a publicly traded country. 9.8 million and they make in the house. 175, 195, why is it the highest elected officials in our nation are making 1/50th, approximately 1/50th of the corporate titans. i think this we paid them more they would be less beholden to special interests. >> brenda: i don't know where to start. they work hard and don't take
7:12 am
that many vacations and get done what they have to do, don't they? >> well, first of all, the ceo's of major corporations actually add value to the economy. i don't think you could make that claim, but i think it's the wrong argument. we have been arguing for years about this pay freeze. what i don't understand is why is there not a merit system there? why is there across the board? i'm sure some lawmakers work their tuckus off and they do deserve a massive raise and i'm sure others goofed off and went to play golf and you know, got their hair cut at the barbershop. so we need to get rid this have whole across the board raise for everyone and go to some merit-based system like the real world does. >> brenda: the real world. jonas, would that really work in government? >> that's exactly where the wheels off the train. it sounds nuts, tens of thousands, hundreds of workers who have an automatic pay increase, kind of like russia, it's just bizarre. what would the alternative be, yes, a merit-based system. who is going to be the manager decides who is the good worker and bad worker.
7:13 am
>> the manager of those employees, like a corporation does. >> right, but corporations have those pay packages 4, 5, 7, 2 million dollars, 3 million dollars, all leveled at mba's going to work in the government and decide to gets a raise like a real corporation? that's fantasy land. no one is ever going to work at the federal level. 2, 3, 4 million. it's not going to happen you have to index inflation automatic pay increase. how would it work, i wouldn't go work there and manage people for a hundred grand. it's nuts. >> how do you think it works in any corporation? you have, because you have the ceo's job-- >> and that's how it works. >> brenda: there you go again, you guys. now-- >> you've got to manage people and then you go to a company where you can make a lot of money. >> brenda: i know we're excited about this. >> ladies and gentlemen, back to the-- >> go ahead, gary k. >> back to the point. these people don't deserve another nickel at this point in time.
7:14 am
they are supposed to be the guardians of our treasure and the money we make and give to them and the bottom line is they have all put us into a 16 trillion dollar hole. the next six years of taxpayer dollars already been spent. that's an unmitigated failure and to think that they should get any more of the tax dollars from us for putting us in this position? i don't think so. >> brenda: all right. toby, where do you fall on this? >> well, i'm intrigued by the concept if we paid our lawmakers more we would get better lawmakers. >> oh, yeah. >> and by the concept that the idea that you know, the lawmaker, many times, is paid in a lot of other ways. one thing he or she does quite well, which is to raise money and if they were to maybe raise part of their salaries by raising money, i'd be for that. but the idea somehow we're in a position that lawmakers have earned a higher salary based on the output they've performed is ludicrous. >> brenda: okay, caroline? >> well, i would say that our
7:15 am
congress has been the least productive in the last 50 years, so i can understand that a lot of people might be upset about the idea, but i do think we would get better lawmakers if we paid them more and also, they have to maintain two households, so when i worked in congress there were a lot of members who slept on their couch and i'm sure that still happens today. i've never met a lawmaker who doesn't work really, really hard. i think the problem is heightened partisanship. maybe bonuses based on how well they play with others and compromise across the partisan aisle. >> and how about pay-- how about higher pay based on what they take care of the deficits and get them down. how about higher pay for performance. that's the way the real country works, not in washington d.c. >> brenda: all right. you know, gary b, you said-- >> more manager-- >> hold on, you said who are the managers? you know the truth is we're the managers and we keep sending them back, but-- >> no kidding. >> no, no, no, exactly, brenda, in fact, that would be a good idea to have the public vote on whether their
7:16 am
congressman or senator actually gets a raise. i was talking more for the federal than the state department stuff like that. >> brenda: no, i grant you that. all right. thanks so much. that's the last word. coming up, don't get a flu shot? then get ready to kiss your job goodbye. it's a plan to keep workers healthy that may give you the chills.
7:17 am
7:18 am
>> coming up an early flu season triggering calls to make flu shots mandatory in the workplace. but is that the best way to keep employees and the company's bottom line
7:19 am
>> a severe flu outbreak hitting early and hitting hard. now, another hospital is firing workers for not getting flu shots. and some here say that's what
7:20 am
all employers should do, jonas. >> i think that an employer in a private sector should be allowed to fire somebody for something that isn't discriminatory. you should have the right to do that. think about the implications here. i don't want my starbucks served by somebody who has the flu who could have prevented that. why should i catch that as a customer and why would the boss want to pass that on to customers so if neve a rule, you don't have to work there, you can leave and go someplace where you're allowed to have the flu and this is something the employer should be allowed to do even though it sounds like they're infringing on your rights. no different than having to wear a uniform or fired for being overweight or-- >> i don't want anybody telling me i've got to get a flu shot or can't go to burger king or whatever. i can do my job. >> i'm with you on that, brenda. i can't imagine giving the employers the power to do this. many employers are doing this,
7:21 am
firing people for not getting flu shots. they only have marginal benefit because it's often hard to predict which strains are going to be the most deadly essentially or spread the quickest across the nation. so those who get the flu shot. 2% get the flu, versus 3% who do not get it. giving the employers the power is like telling employers telling employees they can't smoke or eat fatty food, it's an invasion of our privacy. >> brenda: and companies can pretty much do what they want, right? >> exactly, look, i agree he with caroline, i think that flu shots are hit or miss, but jonas has the more valid point. employers, unless they're infridging on their rights somehow should be allowed to do whatever they want to increases the bottom line. when i worked at ibm i had to wear a white shirt every day. it was stupid, i didn't like white shirts, i looked better in blue, but they thought would help sell more computers and i wore white shirts. i couldn't drink on the job maybe i want add beer at four o'clock, but i couldn't.
7:22 am
employers do all kinds of crazy things, but you know what? that's their write. >> brenda: we don't impose that on bulls and bears. toby, would you make your employees get a flu shot? >> i would first make them all get blue shirts, because i as well look good in blue and absolutely, i mandate that employees are going to work around other people, if they work at home, don't get a flu shot. if you're going to be in an office not only do you have to get a flu shot. if you're showing flu systems we kick you out. you're going home, man, people try to tough it out and all it does it get more people sick and fox studios here, i swear every human being has a cold today. i am cold-free and flu-free, except i go in and go out. >> brenda: i don't know what you're talking about, guys, go home now, please. gary k, what do you think? >> amazingly, i'm going to tell you, look, if i'm a company and i have 45 workers and 25 of them get the flu and they're out for a week, that's going to hurt my business. i think that corporations and small companies should have every right to take care, or
7:23 am
try to take care of the health of their employees or else. i think it's very important, the bottom line, what counts. if you don't do something like that and everybody gets sick, that hurts everybody, and i think some-- i have no problem with the thing done. >> last word, caroline? >> i would say that the most important thing you can do then, if you want to put those in things into place, is make your employees be vegetarian. i'm just wondering what-- >> oh. >> and want them to have days off of work, have them all be vegetarians or vegans. >> and double their salaries, double their salaries, too, keep them healthier. >> brenda: you know what? >> don't tell that to-- >> and everybody, and i am he going home. you can do predictions, toby, thanks to caroline for joining us. searching for the names to help pay for that payroll tax hike most of us got? well, search no further. ♪ [ woman ] ring. ring. progresso. i just served my mother-in-law your chicken noodle soup
7:24 am
but she loved it so much... i told her it was homemade. everyone tells a little white lie now and then. but now she wants my recipe [ clears his throat ] [ softly ] she's right behind me isn't she? [ male announcer ] progresso. you gotta taste this soup.
7:25 am
7:26 am
>> predictions, gary b, you're up. >> brenda, hallelujah, google has been declared free of any search bias by the government. i think the stock makes all-time highs by april. >> brenda: toby, bull other bear? >> my bias is it's all priced in already. >> brenda: toby, your predictions. >> boeing, excuse me is the number one jetliner for 2012, number one for the next four to five years, own them, hold them. i think up 30%.
7:27 am
>> brenda: jonas, bull or bear? >> bear on the pork recipient. >> brenda: gary k your prediction. >> love the autos, car max business is great. i think 25% in the next year, stock acting really well. >> brenda: gary b, bull or bear. i think it it needs a pullback, bearish. >> brenda: and jonas. >> i can't take this all right now. they're useless without verizon, super cool and. >> brenda: gary b, bull or bear. >> slow growth, boring, not for me, bearish. >> brenda: well you talk about cool with jonas, you do, you're the gadget guru. you know who is cool? well, he's going to be showing up in five, four... >> all right. you know we've got a brand new congress, but it's essentially the same old government only bigger and getting much bigger and we don't seem to much care, do we?
7:28 am
hi, everyone and happy weekend, i'm neil cavuto, you want more government and well, you're going to have to put up more dough because the deal transcending ended up only increasing spending. by now you know the score, it didn't cut a thing and let me cut to the chase. a lot more than just rich folks are going to have to cut a check. lots of checks and lots of folks because taxing the rich ain't covering the bill. even with a billion dollar tax hike on the wealthy the next ten years, that works out to about 60 billion bucks a year, barely enough to keep the government running for a week. and like i said, they're not cutting anything and i mean anything. so, we have to find a way to keep feeding the beast. and just taxing the rich ain't going to satisfy even if you took their money, every last cent. ten years out our debt would be higher than it is now, you have to move down the food chain. you have to move down, well, to you, to the under 400 and under 450 grand crowd and i think way under. i'm thinking 50 grand and over, has just started.
7:29 am
hike all of their taxes and i think conservatively 5% all of them and still doesn't cope up with the growth spiraling out of control programs like medicare, medicaid, and social security. and i haven't even touched defense, don't get me going upon defense. just to sustain what we clearly don't want to cut now. we would have to raise everyone's taxes a hell of a lot more than anyone could even fathom. after all we've given up on spending and the only other option would have to be taxing. you call government, and start feeding him, he's hungry and getting hungry. ben stein, charles payne, gerri willis and adam lashinsky, charles payne, feed the beast? >> feed the beast. i wonder how many people-- people peruse their checks and saying, hold on, you know? does warren buffett talk about me because the payroll tax went up? i thought there wasn't going to be a tax increase on everyone. i was shocked the president didn't fight for that, but to your point, this is a very, very, very tip of the

Bulls and Bears
FOX News January 5, 2013 7:00am-7:30am PST

News/Business. The latest market news; the week ahead on Wall Street. New. (CC)

TOPIC FREQUENCY Us 5, Gary K. 2, Nascar 2, Charles Payne 2, Jamie Colby 2, Gary B 2, Brenda 2, Alaska 1, America 1, Unquote 1, Verizon 1, U.s. 1, Google 1, United States 1, Barbershop 1, Gary 1, Washington D.c. 1, Ibm 1, Russia 1, Cavuto 1
Network FOX News
Duration 00:30:00
Scanned in Richmond, CA, USA
Source Comcast Cable
Tuner Virtual Ch. 760 (FOX NEWS HD)
Video Codec mpeg2video
Audio Cocec ac3
Pixel width 1280
Pixel height 720
Sponsor Internet Archive
Audio/Visual sound, color

disc Borrow a DVD of this show
info Stream Only
Uploaded by
TV Archive
on 1/5/2013